Legal Opinion · Dissent

Royal v. Walsh

Wyoming Supreme Court

Decided August 23, 2004No. 03-164Published

1DissentLehman, Justice

[¶ 9] I must respectfully dissent. Upon consideration of the certified questions, I reach a different conclusion than that reached by the majority. Accordingly, I would hold thát disposable income derived from a debtor’s wages and deposited into the debtor’s bank account are exempt from garnishment under Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 1-15-408 and 40-14-50'5(b) (LexisNexis 2003) if the debtor can establish by competent evidence that such sums were derived from earnings for personal services.

[¶ 10] It .is clear that pursuant to Wyoming Stat. Ann. § 1-20-109 (LexisNexis 2001), Wyoming has “opted-out” of…

2Cases cited52 opinions

  1. Philpott v. Essex County Welfare BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Wright v. Union Central Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  3. Porter v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  4. In the Matter of Richard E. BARKER, Debtor-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
  5. United States v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1957

47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API